Youth, do you really not understand what Salty meant by that phrase? He used it frequently…youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 9:06 amBS....I can vividly recall him arguing the opposite during the democratic hit job of Carter Page, and others, where he said "show me the man, and I'll show you the crime". You are here just to troll OS, might want to follow-up with your neurologist...Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 8:59 amMDLax is pointing out something different…. Old Soldier doesn’t believe people should be investigated unless they will be found guilty. He has said so himself. Trying to determine guilt or innocence is not what he expects. He only supports investigations to confirm guilt….that has been his position. Not much needs to be “cleaned up”. He’s a hypocrite like you are.youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 8:52 amI think he is just TLD's clean up guy.....its a pattern.tech37 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 7:22 amIs this the MSNBC interpretation you're pushing here?MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 7:07 amNo, it didn't. That issue was resolved in 10 minutes...Hunter was going to have to risk it and he agreed to it then and there...the deal fell apart because the judge was unwilling to be the arbiter as to whether Hunter violates his probation going forward and Hunter and his team are unwilling to trust a future MAGA GOP to not blow it up for no good cause. They trusted the judge.old salt wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 3:34 amDo you have a brain lesion that prevented you from noticing that the plea deal fell apart because the now elevated SC refused to grant immunity for other potential crimes still under investigation ? ...or is that you being a hypocrite ?Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Aug 21, 2023 10:54 pm Your hurdle is that if it’s not illegal, it’s not worth investigating. You are either a hypocrite or suffering from brain lesions.
The plea deal fell apart because the Fed prosecutors would not guarantee to the Judge that they might not still investigate & charge further crimes.
And they couldn't resolve that in plea discussions subsequently...and so it's all back on the table. With Weiss having his hand strengthened by the threat of potential cases in different jurisdictions.
They will likely reach a new plea deal.
I'm guessing they are your preferred source of info/opinion
It was quite obvious that he was mocking such investigations , not expressing favor.
Tech, I have heard/read reports from multiple reporters who were in the room. That’s what was reported.
I don’t see any particular reason to doubt that reporting. It wasn’t guesswork or analysis, just the tick tock of what happened.
We can imagine the motivation of the various parties, but they haven’t told us directly. My analysis is as I describe of what that tick tock implies. As well as my thoughts about Weiss' position now and how I think it strengthens his hand in a plea negotiation on the same matters they were about to plea out before. And if he feels the need to take it to court, he's able to do so.
What I think you need to ask yourself is whether a Trump White House and Trump appointed AG would have allowed a US Attorney appointed by one's predecessor from another party continue in office when it would have been so easy to replace him with someone more 'loyal'? Would they have kept their hands off that prosecutor's decisions, and when he asked for Special Counsel status given it to him immediately, instead of dumping him? Heck, would a Trump in office not have simply pardoned his son for his past transgressions and said "move on, he's cleaned himself up and paid up, so nothing to see here?"
Now, in your heart of hearts, which path would you prefer a Department of Justice and POTUS take?
